Ok, latest update is as follows:
The Sheriff Clark Depute returned my Incidental Application Form advising "I hereby return your Incidental Application Form as this is not in the correct format under the Simple Procedure Rules. Please re-submit in the correct format, together with proof of service on the claimant."
The form was downloaded from their site. I have uploaded a copy of the submitted form, having first replaced any identifying data with ********** characters
I did not send a copy to Nolans.
Not sure what was wrong with the form? I did sign the form.
Not sure what to do now. Any ideas?
Many thanks,
Pete
form---incidental-application.doc

I checked with the clerk yesterday and was advised that the documentation which I has submitted hadn't been processed yet as the case was currently "On Hold", and they had a backlog due to staff illness.
However, now that he was aware of the contents he would ensure that it was processed this week. The documentation contained the "Incidental Application " + letter from Cabot + email to/from Mediation Clinic.
I will check tomorrow that it has all now been logged, etc.
Thanks for all your help so far - it is much appreciated
Best regards,
Pete

Hi,
Latest update is that I sent off the "Cabot Letter" advising that they couldn't take any further legal action as they could not meet the Section 77 criteria + a copy of my email to the Mediation Clinic / their response.
This was to help show willingness on my part to follow any suggestions of the court.
As per the Court rules I also sent a copy of the same info to Nolans.
The cheekie buggers then sent me an EMAIL (clearly they lifted my info from the info which I sent them) advising:
" We note that you have submitted a letter from our clients confirming that they are not permitted to obtain a judgement or decree against you in court but they can still request that you repay your outstanding balance.
There is a well known Authority in the High Court's decision in the case of McGuffick -v- The Royal Bank of Scotland plc (2009) EWHC 2386 where the Court determined the meaning of the word "enforcement" under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and whether during the period of unenforceability any actions taken by a lender amount to enforcement contrary to Section 77 (4) of the CCA 1974.
The Court decided in this case that the effect of unenforceability is that a lender's rights and a debtor's obligation existed but were not extinguished. The demanding of payment, issuing of a Default Notice, threatening legal proceedings and bringing proceedings themselves did not amount to enforcement.
As you are aware we have already produced a copy of the Credit Agreement.
We have also produced and lodged in process annual statements from period 14th October 2013 to 16th October 2014.
We are waiting for our clients to send us further statements post 2014 in order to fulfil the second part of the Section 77 to 79 request.
At the moment the case has been paused because the Sheriff considers that this matter may be resolved through mediation.
We are hopeful that our clients will send us the information to fulfil the Section 77 request and until such time they are happy for the action to remain paused.
In the meantime, in light of the documentation that we have lodged in process, we will require a note of your defence to the matter given the agreement has now been produced and statements to period 16th October 2014 have been produced.
The terms of the Order of the Court state that both Nolans and you are encouraged to contact each other to settle the case or narrow the issues in dispute.
Our clients are happy to accept payments by way of an instalment plan for payments to be made which are affordable to you.
Our clients may also accept a reduced settlement if you are able to pay a lump sum payment.
In the circumstances we welcome any proposals that you may have.
We look forward to hearing from you.
"
I am pretty annoyed that:
A) They lifted my email address from documents supllied to them for information purposes, and proceeded to send me an email.
B) They consider that somehow sending me a bunch of statements somehow constitutes meeting the section 77 requirement
C) They lifted my email address from documents supllied to them for information purposes, and proceeded to send me an email.
Yeah, I know that points A & C are the same, but it's an important point. Mentioning it just once isn't enough
I am tempted to complain about the misuse of email for communicating with me + asking the Sherriff to restart the case again.
Yes/No?
Thanks in advance.
Pete

Received a letter today from Cabot advisng that they were unable to comply with my Section 77 request.
The letter states "This means that we are not permitted to obtain a judgement or decree against you in Court".
Do I do anything, or wait for a "cancellation of the court action" to come through?
Best regards,
Pete

Will do
Fyi: I received a bill this morning from Cabot for £90, for "legal costs".
They helpfully included various ways that I can pay!!!!
Needless to say, I will not be paying it.
Chancing gits that they are.
I will be more than happy to send them my bill.

No electronic sign up.
1: Credit Card Agreenent
2: All letters sent by Aqua
3: All letters received by Aqua
4: Statements from 17th Nov 2013 to 18th Jun 2017
5: Account History
No sign up agreement. The Credit Card Agreement is simply a generic copy of their terms and conditions which anyone can download from their site.

Found a letter from the court when I got home. I also phoned them this morning.
Quick summary of the letter:
Basically, the case has been "paused" as the Sheriff believes that the matter may be resolved via "Mediation".
Nothing further will happen unless a re-start request is received. This can be done at any time by either party.
A detailed leaflet from The University of Strathclyde Mediation Clinic is enclosed, and you are encouraged to contact them.
If no settlement is arrived at it remains open to you to come back to the court to re-start the case and to seek a judicial decision.
===
I also phoned the court (prior to reading the letter) and was told that if the case is not re-started within 6 months then the Sheriff may contact both parties, and ultimately the case may be cancelled.

From the Sheriff Court. I ticked the contact me via email option on the form.
The email gives no other details.
ICMS-NoReply@scotcourts.gov.uk
This is an automated message, replies to this address will not be read.
If you have not requested this email, please contact the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service on 0131 248 1848.
Alternatively you may email: CivilOnlineHelp@scotcourts.gov.uk
Notification:
Order of the Sheriff has been issued
Protect the environment...please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to
E-MAIL DISCLAIMER
This e-mail, and any files transmitted with it, are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this e-mail in error please notify helpdesk@scotcourts.gov.uk. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service (SCTS). Finally, the recipients should check this e-mail and any attachments for the presence of viruses. The SCTS accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail.
http://www.scotcourtstribunals.gov.uk